Listen to the article
The Pentagon announced Friday it will sever all military training, fellowships, and certificate programs with Harvard University, escalating tensions between the Trump administration and the prestigious Ivy League institution.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that Harvard “no longer meets the needs of the War Department or the military services,” citing concerns about the university’s influence on military officers who participate in its programs.
“For too long, this department has sent our best and brightest officers to Harvard, hoping the university would better understand and appreciate our warrior class,” Hegseth said. “Instead, too many of our officers came back looking too much like Harvard — heads full of globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks.”
In a separate message posted on the social media platform X, Hegseth bluntly declared: “Harvard is woke; The War Department is not.”
The Defense Department will phase out its relationship with Harvard beginning with the 2026-27 academic year, discontinuing graduate-level professional military education, fellowships, and certificate programs. Military personnel currently enrolled at Harvard will be permitted to complete their courses.
Hegseth indicated that similar programs at other Ivy League universities will face evaluation in coming weeks, suggesting potential broader implications for military-academic partnerships across elite institutions.
The decision carries significant weight for both the military and higher education sectors. The U.S. military has historically offered officers various opportunities to pursue graduate-level education at both dedicated war colleges and civilian institutions like Harvard. These programs serve dual purposes—enhancing officers’ professional development while in service and improving their employment prospects after leaving the military.
Hegseth, who himself holds a master’s degree from Harvard, previously demonstrated his personal disillusionment with the university in 2022 when, as a Fox News commentator, he symbolically returned his diploma on air, writing “Return to Sender” on it. A Pentagon social media account recently resurfaced this clip, highlighting the secretary’s longstanding criticisms of the institution.
The Pentagon’s decision represents the latest development in a prolonged conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard University. The White House has targeted Harvard more aggressively than any other academic institution, cutting billions in federal research funding and attempting to restrict the enrollment of international students after the university resisted a series of government demands issued in April.
Administration officials have justified these actions by claiming they are responding to alleged anti-Jewish bias on Harvard’s campus. University leaders have countered that they face illegal retaliation for refusing to adopt the administration’s ideological positions, resulting in Harvard filing two lawsuits against the administration. A federal judge has issued rulings favoring Harvard in both cases, which the administration is now appealing.
Tensions appeared to ease temporarily over the summer when President Trump suggested a resolution was imminent, but negotiations collapsed. Earlier this week, the president intensified demands, calling for Harvard to pay $1 billion as part of any deal to restore federal funding—double his previous request.
This standoff highlights growing tensions between the federal government and academic institutions over issues of ideology, academic freedom, and the relationship between higher education and national security. The Pentagon’s decision to cut ties with Harvard could signal a broader shift in how military educational partnerships are evaluated and structured in the future, with potential implications for both sectors.
For Harvard, the loss of military programs represents both a financial and reputational blow, potentially affecting its standing in national security and public service fields. For the military, the decision raises questions about where and how its future leaders will receive advanced education beyond traditional military institutions.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
The decision to cut ties with Harvard is a bold move, but I can understand the Pentagon’s perspective. It’s critical that military officers are well-grounded in the department’s priorities and culture. However, I hope there is still room for constructive engagement and the open exchange of ideas, even if it’s not through formal programs.
The Pentagon’s concerns about ‘woke’ ideologies influencing its officers are understandable, but I’m not convinced that cutting ties with Harvard is the right solution. A more nuanced approach that fosters healthy debate and critical thinking might be more constructive.
I agree. The military should be open to a range of perspectives, not just those that align with a particular political agenda. Shutting down engagement with prestigious academic institutions could backfire and limit the military’s exposure to innovative thinking.
This is a complex issue and I can see valid arguments on both sides. On one hand, the military needs to ensure its officers are aligned with its core mission and values. But on the other, cutting off ties with prestigious institutions like Harvard could limit exposure to diverse perspectives and innovative thinking. I’ll be curious to see how this plays out.
This is a bold decision by the Pentagon, cutting ties with such a prestigious university. I can understand the desire to ensure military officers are well-aligned with the department’s mission and culture. However, I wonder if severing all ties is the best approach or if there could be room for constructive engagement.
It’s an interesting move, though I’m not sure it will have the intended effect. Isolating the military from diverse perspectives and intellectual discourse could be counterproductive in the long run.
This is an interesting move by the Pentagon. I’m curious to hear more about their concerns over Harvard’s influence on military officers and its ‘globalist and radical ideologies’. What specific issues are they trying to address?
The Pentagon seems to feel that Harvard’s curriculum and approach are at odds with the military’s priorities and values. It will be worth watching how this plays out and whether other institutions face similar scrutiny.
This news raises some important questions about the relationship between the military and academia. While the Pentagon’s focus on maintaining its core values and mission is reasonable, I’m not sure that eliminating all ties with Harvard is the best approach. There may be opportunities for productive collaboration and exchange of ideas.